On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 05:52:24PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
Now it looks like this:
install -C -o root -g wheel -m 444 libalias.a /foo/usr/lib
install -s -o root -g wheel -m 444 libalias.so.4 /foo/lib
ln -fs libalias.so.4 /foo/lib/libalias.so
ln -fs /lib/libalias.so.4
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 10:10:49PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 05:52:24PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
I might be missing an obvious, but I just don't see a reason
why we should use relative linking here: we should just link
to where we really install. With
Doug Barton wrote:
On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote:
My tool is initially just a 'delete these files' tool, but now that I
think about it, it wouldn't be hard to say also 'create these
symlinks'. The hard part here is generating the 'obsolete' lists.
I posted one approach to
On (2003/09/02 09:43), Ian Freislich wrote:
I posted one approach to this today... touch a file right before you
start installworld, then consider anything not newer than that file a
candidate for disposal. There is currently something weird going on in
/usr/lib though... a lot of the
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On (2003/09/02 09:43), Ian Freislich wrote:
I posted one approach to this today... touch a file right before you
start installworld, then consider anything not newer than that file a
candidate for disposal. There is currently something weird going on in
/usr/lib
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 05:52:24PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
I might be missing an obvious, but I just don't see a reason
why we should use relative linking here: we should just link
to where we really install. With the attached patch, I get:
...
+.if ${LIBDIR} != ${SHLIBDIR}
+
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 10:10:49PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 05:52:24PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
I might be missing an obvious, but I just don't see a reason
why we should use relative linking here: we should just link
to where we really install. With
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 09:44:24AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
I think that Gordon took a safe path with creating compatibility symlinks.
Besides, creating compatibility symlinks has a nicety of removing your
stale symlinks in /usr/lib.
I always asked myself whether there is a tool or some
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 08:58:19AM +0200, Christoph P. Kukulies wrote:
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 09:44:24AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
I think that Gordon took a safe path with creating compatibility symlinks.
Besides, creating compatibility symlinks has a nicety of removing your
stale
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ruslan Ermilov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 08:58:19AM +0200, Christoph P. Kukulies wrote:
: On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 09:44:24AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
: I think that Gordon took a safe path with creating compatibility
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 01:22:49AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ruslan Ermilov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 08:58:19AM +0200, Christoph P. Kukulies wrote:
: On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 09:44:24AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
: I
On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote:
My tool is initially just a 'delete these files' tool, but now that I
think about it, it wouldn't be hard to say also 'create these
symlinks'. The hard part here is generating the 'obsolete' lists.
I posted one approach to this today... touch a file
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 01:58:52AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote:
My tool is initially just a 'delete these files' tool, but now that I
think about it, it wouldn't be hard to say also 'create these
symlinks'. The hard part here is generating the
On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
I posted one approach to this today... touch a file right before you
start installworld, then consider anything not newer than that file a
candidate for disposal. There is currently something weird going on in
/usr/lib though... a lot of the files
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote:
:
: My tool is initially just a 'delete these files' tool, but now that I
: think about it, it wouldn't be hard to say also 'create these
: symlinks'. The hard part here
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
:
: I posted one approach to this today... touch a file right before you
: start installworld, then consider anything not newer than that file a
: candidate for
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 09:44:24AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 10:10:49PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 05:52:24PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
I might be missing an obvious, but I just don't see a reason
why we should use relative
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 09:31:29AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 09:44:24AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 10:10:49PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 05:52:24PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
I might be missing an obvious,
On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote:
:
: My tool is initially just a 'delete these files' tool, but now that I
: think about it, it wouldn't be hard to say also
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: : On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: : My tool is initially just a 'delete
M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: I posted one approach to this today... touch a file right before you
: start installworld, then consider anything not newer than that file a
: candidate for disposal. There is currently
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 02:07:42PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 21:56:53 +0300
Ruslan Ermilov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think a workaround would be to use absolute symlinks (at least as an
option).
I might be missing an obvious, but I just don't see a
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 21:56:53 +0300
Ruslan Ermilov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think a workaround would be to use absolute symlinks (at least as an
option).
I might be missing an obvious, but I just don't see a reason
why we should use relative linking here: we should just link
to where
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 17:52:24 +0300
Ruslan Ermilov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doh, you're of course right! An updated patch is attached.
I successfully tested an installworld, nm doesn't fail anymore in my
environment and cdrdao compiles just fine.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
It is easier
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 09:19:07 -0700
Steve Kargl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you linking in libc?
troutmask:kargl[207] nm -D /usr/lib/libc.so | grep fpcl
000b0040 T __fpclassifyd
000afff0 T __fpclassifyf
000b00a0 T __fpclassifyl
I think the problem is, that some tools have a problem
On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 01:54:27PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
[...]
I think the problem is, that some tools have a problem finding it...:
---snip---
(3) [EMAIL PROTECTED] % nm -D /usr/lib/libc.so | grep fpcl
nm: /usr/lib/libc.so: No such file or directory
(4) [EMAIL PROTECTED] % ll
26 matches
Mail list logo
